Plan de Contingencia para el transporte de guaipes con grasa (residuos sólidos no

Contracts should include provisions for quality assurance with respect to individual attorneys, and for the appointed counsel system itself. On an individual level, there should be periodic evaluations of delinquency attorneys, and the contract should indicate the nature of the evaluation. Contracts could provide, for example, for evaluation by an experienced delinquency counsel or consultants. Thus, the Alameda County speaks of the need to “assess the continued

competence, skill level, diligence, integrity and

professionalism of the member at the level required for the member’s current class classification.”137

Contracts should also describe the process for handling any identified deficiencies in performance. A contract could specify, for example, that the attorney must undergo additional training, mentoring on “probation,” or even termination/non-renewal of the contract.138 Many California counties do have contract provisions covering at least some of these elements.

137 _{Rules and Regulations of the Alameda County Bar Association} Criminal Court Appointed Attorneys Program (effective Jan. 12, 2010) (on file with the author) [hereinafter Rules and Regulations of the Alameda County Bar Association]. Placer County, California similarly requires systematic supervision and evaluation of staff performance conducted personally by the head of the contract attorney’s office, with regular formalized comments from judges, other defense lawyers and clients. Contract For Legal Representation of Indigent Persons in the County of Placer (undated) (on file with the author). Riverside County, California, require the contracting attorneys to annually evaluate the performance of subcontracting attorneys, including personal observation in a courtroom setting, review of participation in MCLE programs, and other characteristics such as involvement in efforts to improve the juvenile justice system in Riverside County. Riverside Co. & Burns & Oblachinski, supra, note 67.

138 _{The Alameda County contract provides an extensive process for} assessing and addressing performance problems. Rules and Regulations of the Alameda County Bar Association, supra, note 137 at 7-13.

The oversight system should also provide for regular review of attorney caseload and workload.139 The process should also take into account the impact on workload of any non-delinquency cases being handled by the attorney.140 In jurisdictions where this is an issue, the contract should specify maximum caseload or workload limits. The long existing national caseload standard for delinquency cases is 200 cases per year.141 The prevailing view is that it is more useful to employ a weighted workload measure that considers specified elements. These elements include the complexity of cases, the amount of time needed to complete various tasks, the availability of support services, and other factors that impact the amount of time involved in representation.142 However, as of now, there is no standardized measure for this. For that reason, contracting agencies must develop a framework that works for their jurisdiction. Workload should be determined in light of the activities expected of counsel in the scope of work section of the contract. This will help to ensure adequate representation of juveniles in court proceedings.

It is also critical that any system for appointed counsel provide an accessible mechanism for complaints or other

139 _{For purposes of the discussion in this article, “caseload” refers to the} number of cases a lawyer handles, and “workload” refers to the amount of effort, measured in units of time, for the lawyer to complete work on the caseload. Keeping Defender Workloads Manageable, supra note 126, at 1-3, 9. The distinction is very important in juvenile practice, because of the multiplicity of responsibilities counsel has even in a relatively simple case, and because of the duty of continuing representation in the post- disposition phase.

140

Contracting for Indigent Defense Services, supra note 25; Keeping Defender Workloads Manageable, supra note 126; Ten Core Principles,

supra note 41, at 2.

141 _{National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and} Goals, Task Force on Courts, Report on the Courts, Standard 13.12, at 186 (1973); ratified more recently in American Council of Chief Defenders Statement on Caseloads and Workloads (Aug. 24, 2007), http://www.nlada.org/DMS/Documents/1189179200.71/EDITEDFINALV ERSIONACCDCASELOADSTATEMENTsept6.pdf (last visited Sept. 8, 2011).

142 _{Majd, supra note 20, at 543-83; Keeping Defender Workloads} Manageable, supra note 126, at 8-9.

feedback from children, families, and court personnel.143 Contracts should alert appointed counsel that there is such a process. It should convey that the contract administrator will investigate all complaints, provide a written response, and take prompt action to address deficiencies identified in the investigation. This action may include any needed corrective action or discipline of individual attorneys, or changes needed in the contract appointment system.

Having a meaningful system for oversight serves multiple goals. First, it helps to assure that youth are receiving the amount and quality of representation they are entitled to receive. Second, it provides a mechanism through which the system can respond to suggestions or complaints. Third, it gives a structure for due process when conflicts or complaints arise. And finally, it affords contract administrators with feedback needed to make needed adjustments or changes to appointed counsel programs. Each of these goals contributes to the quality of justice and the integrity of the juvenile justice system.